The University of North Texas at Dallas Policy Manual

Transcription

1 The University of North Texas at Dallas Policy Manual Chapter Academic Program Review Faculty Affairs Policy Statement. UNT Dallas offers high-quality academic programs that are achieved through considerate, collaborative self-study and reflection by the faculty in each of the disciplines and appropriate stewardship by university administrators. To maintain the quality of these programs, the University requires periodic review of its curriculum, operations, and resources. Application of Policy. This policy applies university-wide. Procedures and Responsibilities. Governing Principles. 1. All undergraduate and graduate programs in each department or division shall undergo periodic academic program review. 2. Reviews shall be conducted by a team of reviewers selected by the Provost (see Review Team below). 3. Each program shall normally be reviewed at least once every seven (7) years. Any program may be subject to a more frequent review as determined by the Provost. If a department or program has a specialized accreditation process that requires review less often than seven years, an additional review is not required under this policy. 4. Departments or divisions subject to periodic specialized accreditation reviews may use those reviews to satisfy this requirement. 5. The Associate Provost for Academic Excellence shall maintain a general schedule of program reviews and will notify the Dean, Department Chair and other appropriate individuals (e.g., Program Director) no less than eight (8) months in advance of an upcoming review. 6. The Provost s Office shall publish and maintain a set of guidelines specifying the process by which external reviews take place. Page 1 of 6

2 Provost Guidelines. I. Program Review Process and Timeline. 1. The applicable department or division shall be notified at least eight (8) months in advance that a program review has been scheduled. 2. The review team and its chair shall be established six (6) months in advance of the review. 3. The Office of the Associate Provost for Academic Excellence shall oversee the arrangements for the review visit. 4. The applicable department or division shall assemble its self-study materials (see Self-Study Document below) for posting online at least one month in advance of the review team visit and shall notify the reviewers how to access the materials. 5. Review visits shall typically extend over two days and include the following meetings: i. an initial meeting on the first day attended by the Provost, Associate Provost for Academic Excellence, Dean, and, if applicable, the Department Chair with the review team; ii. iii. iv. meetings with departmental faculty; meetings with students of the Department, including both undergraduate and graduates students where appropriate; a meeting with the Dean and Department Chair, if applicable; v. a meeting with a graduate faculty member, when appropriate; vi. other meetings as requested by the review team; vii. unscheduled time for the review team to formulate initial recommendations; and Page 2 of 6

3 viii. an exit interview with the Provost, Associate Provost for Academic Excellence, Dean, and Department Chair, if applicable. 6. The review team shall submit a written report of their review as soon as is feasible following the completion of the review visit. 7. The applicable Department or Division will draft a response to the reviewers report (see Reviewers Report and Responses below). II. Self-Study Document. A department or division undergoing a program review shall prepare a set of materials to aid the review team in their task of reviewing the strengths, weaknesses, challenges, and opportunities of the unit. 1. The preparation of materials for a program review should be an inclusive process, involving all continuing faculty members to the extent possible. 2. The materials should include, but need not be limited to, the following: i. the unit s strategic plan; ii. iii. iv. documentation of expected learning outcomes for each of the department s or division s degree programs (described in the department or division assessment plans and course syllabi); documentation of assessment of student learning outcomes for each degree program and how these results have been used to improve the quality of the academic program; a summary of research productivity; v. curriculum vitae for all continuing faculty; vi. program enrollment information and other metrics including but not limited to graduation rates, retention rates, and time to degree compared to peers over the review period; and Page 3 of 6

4 vii. a brief summary statement (no more than 10 pages) of the perceived strengths, weaknesses, challenges and opportunities of the unit. 3. Specialized accreditation processes may require other materials in addition to those listed here. 4. The department s or division s self-study materials shall be posted online for the review team to access at least one month in advance of the reviewers visit. 5. A hard copy of or electronic access to all of the materials shall be made available to the chair of the review team during the visit. III. Review Team. The review team will be composed of a minimum of four (4) members, but not more than five (5) members. 1. Selection of reviewers. i. The Provost will initially select three UNT Dallas faculty members to serve on the review team. ii. iii. iv. At least two of these three members should be from another division and the third from a different department than the department or division where the program under review is housed. If a graduate program is involved in the review, the review team should include a member of the graduate faculty. The department or division shall propose a list of five potential external reviewers to the Dean or Associate Provost for Academic Excellence (as applicable) at least six months in advance of a scheduled review. v. The Dean or Associate Provost for Academic Excellence (as applicable) shall consult with the Provost before finalizing the list of external reviewers and alternates. vi. vii. The Provost shall select one of the individuals from the list of potential external reviewers provided by the department or division to serve on the review team. The Provost should identify alternate reviewers in the event one or more Page 4 of 6

5 of the chosen reviewers declines to participate in the review. viii. The Provost will cover the honorarium and costs associated with the external reviewer. 2. Once the set of reviewers is finalized, the Provost will appoint a chair for the review team from among the reviewers. IV. Reviewer Report and Response. The reviewers report, as well as the response of the Department, Division, and the University will be documented in writing. 1. Following the submission of the written report, the department or division shall prepare a written response to the reviewers recommendations and submit that response to the Dean or Associate Provost for Academic Excellence (as applicable). 2. The Dean or Associate Provost for Academic Excellence shall review the department s or division s response and prepare a written recommendation for the Provost. 3. If the review includes graduate programs, the Dean of the division shall review the reviewers report and prepare a written response to any recommendations involving graduate studies in the unit and submit that response to the Associate Provost for Academic Excellence. 4. The Associate Provost for Academic Excellence shall review the dean s response and prepare a written recommendation regarding the review of graduate programs to the Provost. 5. The Provost shall meet with the Department Chair, Dean, and Associate Provost for Academic Excellence to discuss the outcome of the review and formulate the final response. 6. The Provost shall provide a written final response to the department or division indicating any actions the university will take in response to the program review. Page 5 of 6

6 References and Cross-references. N/A Approved: 11/15/2010 Effective: 11/15/2010 Revised: 3/7/2013 Page 6 of 6